Hyalojassus Evans, 1972

Dai, Wu, Dietrich, Christopher H. & Zhang, Yalin, 2015, A review of the leafhopper tribe Hyalojassini (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae: Iassinae) with description of new taxa, Zootaxa 3911 (1), pp. 1-142 : 21

Hyalojassus Evans, 1972

Hyalojassus Evans, 1972:648

Type-species: Hyalojassus takensis Evans, 1972

Color brown, red or tan, with or without small spots or larger maculae ( Fig. 3 A–H). Body robust, weakly to moderately depressed ( Fig. 3 A–H). Head in dorsal view much narrower than pronotum; crown short, rounded to face, anterior margin in dorsal view slightly to moderately produced medially ( Fig. 3 A, C, E, G); vertex and frontoclypeus transversely rugose; face much broader than tall ( Fig. 3 B, D, F, H); gena broadly rounded, concavely emarginate below eye; rostrum slender, extended slightly beyond front trochanter; anteclypeus slightly to strongly convex, tapered towards apex, apex truncate, even with lower margin of gena; frontoclypeus convex; antennal ledge well developed, broad, slightly oblique; lateral frontal suture nearly obsolete, extended only short distance above antennal ledge; ocellus large, distinctly mesad of antennal pit and distant from eye. Pronotum strongly convex, with fine transverse rugae; lateral margins long, strongly carinate, evenly divergent posterad. Exposed part of mesonotum and scutellum together distinctly longer than pronotum, transversely rugose; scutellar suture arched anterad, scutellum weakly convex with apex acute ( Fig. 3 A–H). Forewing venation obscure in basal half; membrane hyaline except near base of costal field and base of clavus; erect setae conspicuous and distributed over entire surface; appendix well developed, extended to wing apex, slightly narrower than inner apical cell; three closed anteapical cells present; apical cells 2–4 short, parallel-sided; texture of inner apical cell same as that of appendix and adjacent apical cell ( Fig. 3 A–H). Front femur with pair of dorsoapical macrosetae and preapical AD macroseta; AM with large distal seta, preapical setae poorly differentiated; intercalary row with several scattered setae; AV with several setae; tibia flat and bicarinate dorsally, rows AD and PD with 7–8 and 6–7 macrosetae, respectively. Mesothoracic femur with two dorsoapical macrosetae and one preapical AD seta; AM, AV, and PD each with three or more preapical macrosetae; tibial rows AD and PD as on front leg. Hind femur macrosetae 2+2+1 with antepenultimate seta as large as others; tibial rows PD, AD, and AV with 14–16, 12–14, and 12–14 macrosetae, respectively; tarsomere I without enlarged dorsoapical setae; row PV with 7–8 cucullate setae; pecten with 4 slender, tapered platellae.

Male abdominal apodemes poorly developed. Pregenital sternite tapered,> 1.5 times longer than sternite VII. Genital capsule strongly retracted into segment VIII at rest, taller than long when everted; pygofer with caudal margin straight or slightly convex in lateral view, with many macrosetae at dorsal margin and group of short setae more ventrally, ventral margin without process, with posteroventral lobe partially separated from base of pygofer by ventrolateral cleft ( Figs 14 A, 15A, 16A, 17A). Subgenital plates separated basally, depressed, variable in shape, with few setae ( Figs 14 F, 15D. 16B, 17B). Connective well sclerotized, shieldlike, longer than broad, subtruncate anteriorly, with pair of short lateral lobes, articulated to aedeagus by hingelike joint ( Figs 14 C, 15E, 16C, 17C). Style elongate and slender, apodeme straight or curved upward in lateral view, subequal to or shorter than apophysis in length, extended anterodorsad; apophysis curved upward or sigmoid in lateral view, with one or more preapical projections, without conspicuous setae ( Figs 14 D, 15E, 16C, 17E). Aedeagus with preatrium short, dorsal apodeme well developed; shaft curved dorsad in lateral view, apex slightly to strongly bifid, with or without pair of apical processes, processes if present slender and extended distad; gonopore apical ( Figs 14 C, 15E, 16E, 16F, 17D, 17F). Female unknown.

Distribution. Thailand.

Notes. Examination of the type of H. takensis revealed that Evans’ (1972) original figures and description are not accurate. The genus as presently defined is somewhat heterogeneous and intergrades with Coriojassus in both external morphology and male genitalia structure, but differs in lacking pygofer processes.

Figures

FIGURE 3. Dorsal and lateral habitus. A, B, Hyalojassus takensis Evans; C, D, Hyalojassus menglaensis sp. nov.; E, F, Hyalojassus punctulatus sp. nov.; G, H, Hyalojassus elongatus sp. nov.

FIGURE 14. Hyalojassus takensis Evans A. Genital capsule, lateral view; B. Aedeagus, ventral view; C. Aedeagus, lateral view; D. Style, lateral view; E. Apex of style, ventral view; F. Subgential plate, ventral view.